MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336477031 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btw227

densityCut: an efficient and versatile topological approach for automatic clustering of biological data

2016· article· en· W2336477031 on OpenAlexaff
Jiarui Ding, Sohrab P. Shah, Anne Condon

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceTopological data analysisData miningTopology (electrical circuits)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: Many biological data processing problems can be formalized as clustering problems to partition data points into sensible and biologically interpretable groups. RESULTS: This article introduces densityCut, a novel density-based clustering algorithm, which is both time- and space-efficient and proceeds as follows: densityCut first roughly estimates the densities of data points from a K-nearest neighbour graph and then refines the densities via a random walk. A cluster consists of points falling into the basin of attraction of an estimated mode of the underlining density function. A post-processing step merges clusters and generates a hierarchical cluster tree. The number of clusters is selected from the most stable clustering in the hierarchical cluster tree. Experimental results on ten synthetic benchmark datasets and two microarray gene expression datasets demonstrate that densityCut performs better than state-of-the-art algorithms for clustering biological datasets. For applications, we focus on the recent cancer mutation clustering and single cell data analyses, namely to cluster variant allele frequencies of somatic mutations to reveal clonal architectures of individual tumours, to cluster single-cell gene expression data to uncover cell population compositions, and to cluster single-cell mass cytometry data to detect communities of cells of the same functional states or types. densityCut performs better than competing algorithms and is scalable to large datasets. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Data and the densityCut R package is available from https://bitbucket.org/jerry00/densitycut_dev CONTACT: : condon@cs.ubc.ca or sshah@bccrc.ca or jiaruid@cs.ubc.ca SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomicsFrench-language works237,207